EU Trade Talks Thread

[JohnL]

These are the bodies the Government intends to ignore in their law breaking bill

In this section?

?relevant international or domestic law? includes?

(a) any provision of the Northern Ireland Protocol;

(b) any other provision of the EU withdrawal agreement;

© any other EU law or international law;

(d) any provision of the European Communities Act 1972;

(e) any provision of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018;

(f) any retained EU law or relevant separation agreement law;

(g) any other legislation, convention or rule of international or

domestic law whatsoever, including any order, judgment or

decision of the European Court or of any other court or tribunal;

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/58-01/0177/20177.pdf

#ukinternalmarketbill

[j.a.]

This is going to be...interesting.

[pk]

j.a. Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> This is going to be...interesting.

it's shameful dishonesty

[Sephiroth]

mad that this government is behaving so irresponsibly over international treaties, with the whole world watching and judging, and people in favour of brexit aren't on here talking about it

[keano77]

Nothing to talk about.

A bill has been put forward that has had the desired effect of making the EU pee its pants and Remaners run round like headless chickens. Nothing has been voted on, no Act passed.

Chill folks.

[Sephiroth]

Totally detached from reality

[Sephiroth]

Just to remind you keano - this government stood at the last election on the promise of no more negotianions, the deal was oven ready

They are renaging on their promise to their own voters, never mind international law and the politics of other countries who we will need to trade with in the future

And of course, not forgetting the potential damage to peace in Northern Ireland

The EU isn't peeing its pants - they are just trying as best they can to deal with recaltricant children

[pk]

keano77 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Nothing to talk about.

>

> A bill has been put forward that has had the

> desired effect of making the EU pee its pants and

> Remaners run round like headless chickens. Nothing

> has been voted on, no Act passed.

>

> Chill folks.

A PM effectively saying that a deal he did is sh*t having said it was brilliant is nothing to talk about?

That agreement was voted on and executed and you think planning not to honour it is not an issue?

It?s unlikely to make EU or other potential trade partners think that we can be trusted

But I guess some people think that being a massive bullsh*ter is something to be proud of

[Sephiroth]

of course keano will just look at our posts and file under "remainers headless chickens" completely oblivious to the damage being done

no ownership

no acknowledgement

no shame

[diable rouge]

Source: Sam Lowe

So, the thing that?s playing on my mind:

If UK really wanted to blow up talks it would have proposed legislation to scrap tests on products of animal origin entering Northern Ireland from GB; import/export declarations for GB goods being shipped to NI; etc.

But it didn?t.

The issues UK has chosen to focus on:

Scrapping exit summary declarations on goods sent from NI to GB b?cos Boris promised something Protocol doesn?t offer. But does EU really care about this in grand scheme of things? Probably not.

State aids. Here UK is trying to ensure EU state aid rules only apply in Northern Ireland, not in the rest of the UK.

EU definitely cares about this - but GB rules could/should be dealt with via FTA.

But man, this is a ridiculously risky approach.

Entirely relies on the EU deciding to be the grown up in the room.

[keano77]

Deep breaths and count to 10 remainers. Exciting yourselves is not good for your blood pressure.

It?s a tactic to up the stakes in the negotiations. Barnier was caught with his trousers down colouring in paragraphs with his highlighter pens.

The EU has now woken up and the big players will need to get off their arses and get involved.

Genius really.

[TheCat]

It may well be 'just' a fairly reckless negotiating tactic, and perhaps if we had the impression that this govt really were the 'smartest guys in the room', then I might have more confidence that there was robust thought and game-theory behind it. As it stands I'm more eyes closed and fingers crossed that it 'works' without the UK's reputation being permanently damaged too much..

As an aside, I think enough water has flown under the bridge over the past 4 years, that we can disaggregate people 'in favour of brexit', from people in favour of how this government is handling itself. They are two very different things. Its not often I agree with Mr Owen Jones...but his article today contains a neat summary of why its not just 'brexiteers' to blame for us getting to the position we now find ourselves....

"That doesn?t absolve the [Labour] leadership of its own mistakes, such as not settling on a clearly defined soft Brexit earlier, using the political capital of its 2017 gains to make a passionate and principled case. The conflict-averse Corbyn left a vacuum and the stop Brexit movement filled it. But as Brexit returns to the headlines and there is consensus in the commentariat that the opposition is cleverly sidestepping Johnson?s trap, let us conclude that that should have been everyone?s approach from the very beginning.

We could have accepted the referendum, negotiated a close relationship, and pivoted back to the domestic issues that really matter. Instead, we have a hard-right Tory government with an unassailable majority that bungled the pandemic and has set Britain on course for the hardest Brexit possible"

[pk]

keano77 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Deep breaths and count to 10 remainers. Exciting

> yourselves is not good for your blood pressure.

>

> It?s a tactic to up the stakes in the

> negotiations. Barnier was caught with his trousers

> down colouring in paragraphs with his highlighter

> pens.

>

> The EU has now woken up and the big players will

> need to get off their arses and get involved.

>

> Genius really.

so for those of us with less trust in Boris than you seem to have, tell us what this genius move will deliver in real terms

[Sephiroth]

The problem with Jones' article, and with anyone with some vague notion of a softer brexit - is that their softer brexit can't exist in reality either

Because it's not remainers like me at fault - if some softer version of Brexit was defined by May(or Corbyn) and presented - the very hardcore nutters who have driven this whole thing for decades - the very people anyone supporting brexit has to take responsibility for wouldn't stand for it.

If you solve a problem like Ireland by staying a member of Single Market, you really think Jenkins and co wouldn't rip everything up?

[keano77]

I?m not sure pk. It is a bit high stakes.

Both sides want a deal. Unfortunately the EU still wants to ensnare the UK in its spider?s web in perpetuity.

Compromise would be the best solution. However, a no deal would not be disastrous either as we chart our way in a post-Covid world.

[Sephiroth]

translation - uk wants same benefits it had as a member whilst continuing to do it's own thing

would love to have some examples of that compromise

[Sephiroth]

" Unfortunately the EU still wants to ensnare the UK in its spider?s web in perpetuity."

you do know that some of us are from other EU countries and that sentences like this show a mind detached from reality right?

[keano77]

I suggest you read what is in the bill and try to understand why it is there.

[pk]

keano77 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I?m not sure pk. It is a bit high stakes.

So you think it?s genius even tho you know that it?s a high stakes move with an uncertain impact?

That?s weird

[keano77]

It woke you up.

[Sephiroth]

"It woke you up."

That's hardly the point of all of this is it?

[pk]

keano77 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I suggest you read what is in the bill and try to

> understand why it is there.

it's there cos Boris doesn't want to honour an agreement that he made

which as a matter of fact makes him dishonest and untrustworthy, shameful

[keano77]

It?s not as simple as that pk.

Forgive me for cut and pasting from The Telegraph

?... The 1707 Articles of Union between England and Scotland, and those between Great Britain and Ireland in 1800, abolished all customs duties between the different parts of the United Kingdom. They also declared that the citizens of all parts should be ?on the same footing in respect of trade and navigation, and in all treaties with foreign powers...?

Now, the WA has given the EU power to override UK unity and seamless trade all because the EU wants to collect taxes if goods enter the Republic.

An oversimplification on my part perhaps but since when did the UK bow down to foreign tax collectors?

Discuss

[j.a.]

keano77 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I?m not sure pk. It is a bit high stakes.

>

> Both sides want a deal. Unfortunately the EU still

> wants to ensnare the UK in its spider?s web in

> perpetuity.

>

> Compromise would be the best solution. However, a

> no deal would not be disastrous either as we chart

> our way in a post-Covid world.

And there it is. I?m amazed how many Brexiters have come round to the idea that No-Deal maybe isn?t so bad after all.

Leave didn?t fight the referendum on the idea of a No-Deal, and if you think they did I suggest you revisit exactly what they said in 2016.

The EU have played hardball and now you?re claiming that it?s all their fault after all. Childish and naive. You won, own it. ?Spiders web in perpetuity?. Oh please...

The whole thing is no doubt a high-stakes poker game, albeit one on which the British govt has decided to behave...questionably...but personally I?d appreciate it if Leave voters stopped claiming they were always ok with No-Deal. Hardly any of you were, but now you all act like it?s no big thing.

And let?s be f#*^ing clear about something:

Boris signed the WA. He campaigned on it. IDS (and a lot of other Tories) stood up and said there?s been enough talking, you?ve all had plenty of time to study it, now vote for it.

So they did. And the GE was pretty clear-cut too.

And NOW they?re saying it was done in a rush, and that it was always understood that it would need clarifying afterwards, and that it?s ok because they?re only going back on something they?ve agreed to in a specific and limited way?

You?re an intelligent person. Please don?t tell me you think any of that is ok.

If the agreement contains stuff that is detrimental to us, then WHY DID THE GOVERNMENT TELL PARLIAMENT THAT IT WAS A GOOD IDEA AND SUBSEQUENTLY SIGN IT? (Caps mine and very intentional).

The whole thing is bonkers.

[keano77]

UK has already breached withdrawal agreement, EU lawyers say

Leaked legal opinion says bloc already has grounds to take ?legal remedies? that could lead to financial and trade sanctions

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/sep/10/fears-grow-that-uk-is-preparing-to-quit-brexit-talks

Project fear version 10,001?